COINTELPRO Continues: Dr. Mutulu Shakur

Since 1968, or possibly even earlier, Dr. Mutulu Shakur has been a target of the FBI’s Counter-Intelligence Program (COINTELPRO) and subsequent U.S. government programs attacking the Black Liberation Movement. Because of the similarities of these programs, in this article, the term COINTELPRO is used generally to reflect organized and intentional repression or counterinsurgency

Dr. Shakur is a Black revolutionary, and has been targeted as an enemy of the U.S. State for most of his adult life. Throughout his 36 years in prison, he has lived his life as a peacemaker, mentoring and teaching the people in prison with him without a single rule infraction involving violence. But even while he continues to live in captivity, a program of unrelenting repression defines every aspect of his life, repression implemented by the combined weight of the Bureau of Prisons (BOP), FBI, US Parole Commission (USPC), US Attorneys, and sitting Judges. Any assessment of his special treatment and the conditions under which he lives can only conclude that COINTELPRO has been implemented against him continuously for the last 36 years.

Dr. Shakur has been denied parole nine times since he became eligible in 1996. Unlike most other people in prison, he was denied his mandatory release date after serving 30 years. For his entire incarceration, he has been on a continuing twohour hold, meaning he must be physically viewed by a prison staffer every two hours. He has been transferred to maximum security prisons four times on nondisciplinary transfers—prison staff refer to this as "diesel therapy." Dr. Shakur has spent years in solitary confinement, and been “disappeared” by the Bureau of Prisons twice—his whereabouts inside the prison system were unknown. Despite his current and ongoing suffering from advanced bone cancer, which was neglected for years by the prison medical system, he has been denied compassionate release three times. The overall intention is clear—death by incarceration.

COINTELPRO and Life inside the BOP

COINTELPRO may also have influenced his sentence calculation. Mutulu was sentenced for actions before 1987, when federal sentencing reform was enacted. People sentenced under the "old law" were entitled to receive "extra" good time (EGT) as an award for fulfilling work assignments or programming. EGT was awarded routinely to the vast majority of prisoners in federal prison at that time. BOP policy directed staff to award EGT widely because the federal prison system was severely overcrowded. Awarding extra good time allowed for earlier release.

As some of his colleagues discussed in a transcribed interview, Dr. Shakur played a critical role in transforming prison culture at every institution where he has been held captive. He taught numerous classes in several prisons, volunteered for Suicide Watch to support people in mental health crises, arranged for cultural presentations inside various prisons, and acted as mediator between prison factions. Yet he has never been awarded EGT except when it was automatically awarded by computer, despite excellent work reviews and letters of commendation from prison staff.

According to BOP policy, Dr. Shakur has been denied at least 967 days of EGT. If this good time were properly credited to his sentence, Dr. Shakur would be eligible for immediate release.

Because of its notoriety and political content, COINTELPRO also designated Mutulu’s case as an "Original Jurisdiction" for purposes of parole. This designation requires that any hearing examiner’s findings must be reviewed and approved by the entire Commission. Requiring review of parole decisions at this highest level ensures that the decision will be highly politicized.

COINTELPRO and the U.S. Parole Commission

First arrested in 1986, Dr. Shakur was eligible for parole in 1996 after serving 10 years of his 60-year sentence. Continuous, retaliatory transfers between 1993 and 1996 were designed to prevent a stable preparation period for his initial parole hearing. Just prior to his long-awaited first opportunity for parole in 2002, Dr. Shakur was again transferred arbitrarily between institutions in different parts of the U.S., with neither a disciplinary hearing nor any explanation. Because he was constantly being transferred, he was denied a timely initial parole hearing. Thus began the USPC pattern of violating its own regulations.

In an extraordinary move, the USPC illegally delayed his first hearing until 2002. The Parole Commission also used information against him that they knew was false in order to prevent that initial hearing from going forward. Ultimately, Dr. Shakur had to file and win a habeas corpus lawsuit in order to have his first parole hearing scheduled at all.

By the USPC’s own standards, Dr. Shakur should have been released at his first parole hearing in 2002. He had already served 16 years in prison, nearly 6 years past his first parole eligibility date. According to USPC guidelines, his salient factor score was "10," the highest possible score, indicating he posed no threat to public safety and would likely be successful in completing parole. But Dr. Shakur was not only denied parole at that first hearing in 2002, but he also received a 15year set-off, meaning that all parole hearings held within that 15-year period would be the minimal "interim" hearings required by statute. Those hearings rarely change the 15-year set-off date. Although a hearing examiner agreed with Shakur’s argument that his reconsideration date should be 2011, the Commission refused to advance the date of his reconsideration hearing.

The Threat of Truth and Reconciliation—Parole Hearing 2014

Parole hearings between 2006 and 2014 had continued the pattern of denying Dr. Shakur’s release. In 2013, Dr. Shakur was teaching an approved class inside FCIVictorville on International Human Rights. The prison had approved his calls to Professor Stanford from the California State University at Northridge, with whom he was consulting about the class. On one of Dr. Shakur’s calls, Professor Stanford placed him on speakerphone and he spoke to her class about the concept of Truth and Reconciliation. Although her number had been approved by the institution, the call was written up as a "serious" rules violation. Mutulu was placed in segregation and suffered a serious stroke because he was unable to continue the health regimen that managed his hypertension through exercise and nutrition.

At his 2014 parole hearing, the hearing examiner reviewed Dr. Shakur’s record, including the phone call—and found him eligible for parole in her report. COINTELPRO again intervened: Dr. Shakur’s case was an "Original Jurisdiction" case, because of the political nature of his conviction. All decisions by Hearing Officers in "Original Jurisdiction" cases must be approved by the U.S. Parole Commissioners themselves. Though the hearing examiner who interviewed Dr. Shakur approved his parole, the Commissioners once again denied his release, citing the "serious nature" of the telephone call to Professor Stanford’s class. The USPC continues to cite this 2013 rule infraction as a valid reason to deny Dr. Shakur’s parole.

"Mandatory" Parole Denied in 2016

Having served over thirty years of his federal sentence, Dr. Shakur became eligible for release on “mandatory parole” in February 2016. Rather than release him, the USPC scheduled a hearing to determine Mutulu’s eligibility for mandatory parole. Dr. Shakur was not notified that this was technically an initial hearing for mandatory parole, and he was not informed of his right to review new information provided to the USPC by the Department of Justice (DOJ). He was not informed that the hearing differed in any way from an interim parole hearing, nor of his right to submit new information. He expected to be released at that time.

Unsurprisingly, the parole commission denied Dr. Shakur mandatory parole, finding one 1990 positive drug test (which Dr. Shakur has repeatedly denied) and four minor telephone infractions over 30 years of incarceration to be “serious” institutional violations. The USPC officially concluded that Dr. Shakur would commit future crimes if released because of his occasional use of the term “stiff resistance” to sign correspondence—so they denied his parole. The USPC acknowledges that it did not consider the positive recommendations and evaluations of BOP corrections and command staff who supervise Dr. Shakur every day.

One reason given for this denial of mandatory parole was a finding that Dr. Shakur’s acceptance of responsibility was "disingenuous and insincere"—far from an objective finding. No evidence of any kind supported this biased and arbitrary conclusion. More importantly, the USPC is nowhere authorized to consider "acceptance of responsibility" in its decisions. "Accepting responsibility for a crime" is not required by any law governing the parole process. This standard was improperly applied to deny parole to Dr. Shakur in his 2016 mandatory parole hearing

Denying Dr. Shakur release on mandatory parole further proves that the USPC and BOP have treated Dr. Shakur far differently from similarly situated people for mandatory release. An FOIA request by Dr. Shakur’s lawyers revealed that the Commission had not denied mandatory parole to anyone with a similar institutional history.

2018: Still No Relief

Dr. Shakur next parole hearing took place in May of 2018. Several BOP officials testified that he had been cooperative with staff in every way, had no recent rule violations, and generally that there was no reason to believe he would commit any crimes if released. Besides serving two more years without even a minor rule violation, Dr. Shakur also provided new evidence in the form of letters recommending parole by BOP Associate Warden Keilman, familial and professional support letters, an analysis of his exemplary prison record, and a positive comprehensive risk assessment report. The evidence overwhelmingly showed that Dr. Shakur was ready and able to re-integrate into society, and extremely unlikely to ever reoffend. He had an effective and realistic reentry plan he shared with the Commission, firm offers of employment, and of over 150 faith-based leaders who affirm that he has consistently promoted and supported the peaceful resolution of social conflicts.

Consistent with their previous pattern of treatment toward Dr. Shakur, the USPC once again failed to follow its own internal guidelines for conducting interim hearings. The USPC acted improperly by devoting most of the hearing to testimony about the original crimes—at a parole hearing 33 years later, when evaluating behavior in prison and current public safety risk are the standards for release.

After stating he had not read Dr. Shakur’s submissions, this hearing examiner simply announced his adverse decision, recommending against parole at the conclusion of the hearing. This decision was affirmed in the official Notice of Action, which states “… you have seriously violated the rules of the institution and there is a reasonable probability that [if released] you will commit Federal State or local crime[s].” This finding was based on his 2013 telephone call and his use of "stiff resistance" to end his letters.

By law, people in prison have the right to appeal parole denials to a National Appeals Board comprised of Commissioners who did not make the original decision. Currently, only two Parole Commissioners remain. Any appeal to the National Appeals Board is reviewed by exactly the same Commission members who made the original decision. This violates the original intent of Congress that people in prison should have the right to review of any parole decision by different decision-makers.

2020: Parole Hearing in a Prison Hospital

In 2019, Dr. Shakur was transferred to FMC Lexington, a BOP medical facility, after being diagnosed with advanced bone cancer (multiple myeloma). His October 2020 parole hearing was held with Dr. Shakur in a wheelchair, just having recovered from COVID-19. The original prosecuting attorney participated in the hearing, as he had previously. Rather than using a standard of current dangerousness, the parole hearing officer once again allowed hours of testimony about the 1981 armored truck robbery. Once again, Dr. Shakur’s language and correspondence—whether mentioning COINTELPRO or using “stiff resistance” to sign off on his letters—were used to justify keeping this 70-year-old man in prison.

In the course of several hearings, the USPC has used the fact that the term COINTELPRO is mentioned on Dr. Shakur’s website as proof that he defines himself as a victim of the government and therefore is not remorseful for his actions. In fact, during Dr. Shakur’s trial, the trial Judge said:

Petitioner while exercising constitutional liberties was illegally pursued by federal law enforcement officers … [T]he rights of Petitioner … were violated by the COINTELPRO program

This was an important admission by Judge Haight. Judge Haight recognized that there was an illegal program of the FBI that Dr. Shakur was directly impacted by. Dr. Shakur has always maintained that being a target of COINTELPRO drove him (as well as many others in the Black liberation movement) to take the actions he did. This is not the same thing as saying he is innocent. He can be a target of the FBI program and accept responsibility for his actions at the same time. However, the USPC only hears the word victim and then conflates that with a refusal to take responsibility for his actions. This position of the USPC is a violation of Dr. Shakur’s right to speech. This is too nuanced for the USPC and a use of language and what should be protected speech to deny him parole over and over.

2022: Federal Courts Intervene but the USPC Triumphs

While he was still at Victorville, Dr. Shakur had filed a habeas corpus petition in 2018, challenging abuse by the USPC in several of his hearings. In early 2022, a judge in Southern California ruled that Shakur had been wrongly denied parole in 2016—that the telephone call broadcast to Stanford students should never have been considered. So, in April 2022, Dr. Shakur had a second "mandatory" parole hearing. Despite his advancing multiple myeloma and increasing immobility and weakness, the USPC denied his parole. His Notice of Action found that there was a likelihood he would "commit new local, state, or federal crimes" and that he had "means and opportunity to influence others."

COINTELPRO 5 Terminal Illness and Medical Torture

Medical treatment inside the federal Bureau of Prisons is criminally deficient and inadequate. While it’s impossible to directly link COINTELPRO to Dr. Shakur’s current medical crisis, his status as a political prisoner has always inhibited his access to medical treatment. In 2014, he suffered from a stroke while in solitary confinement, which required several months for recovery. For over a year he experienced pain in his ribs and pelvic area, which finally led to x-rays that suggested a possible cancer. He was suffering from extensive painful bone lesions, caused by the growth of the bone marrow cancer in parts of his spine, ribs and pelvis.

In April of 2019 the Victorville medical department finally recommended cancer tests and scans, but Dr. Shakur did not receive these tests until August. The bone marrow biopsy results with a definitive diagnosis of multiple myeloma was not communicated to him until October. The tumor lesions have continued to expand. This is an aggressive cancer, which requires aggressive and uninterrupted treatment. When Dr. Shakur is transported to an outside hospital for cancer treatments, the BOP requires that he be accompanied by 4 guards in addition to a driver—because of COINTELPRO. COVID lockdowns as well as staff shortages have severely restricted movement to outside hospitals, which seriously compromises the effectiveness of the treatment.

Dr. Shakur applied for compassionate release in 2019 and again in 2020, as his medical condition rapidly deteriorated. Both petitions were denied by the BOP, despite copious medical evidence of his suffering. Compassionate release was also denied in 2020 by the same judge who originally sentenced him to 60 years in prison. The Bureau of Prisons denied Dr. Shakur’s third compassionate release request in January 2022. There is no appeal. After further severe degradation of his health, the BOP denied his fourth petition for compassionate release in May of 2022.

The U.S. government is exercising its revenge against Dr. Mutulu Shakur by using a trick of judicial construction and timing: options available to people sentenced after November 1987 are not available to people sentenced before that date. Old law prisoners cannot directly petition the courts like new law people; they still have to go through BOP compassionate release processes. And now the BOP is saying that they will defer to the Parole Commission in the case of any old law person eligible for parole. This leaves all decisions to be made by a two-person body that is moribund, dysfunctional and on legislative life-support. The entire system has basically said: NO WAY OUT.

COINTELPRO Continues

Every effort to win Dr. Shakur’s release has been rejected, delayed, and denied, all while his health continues its precipitous decline. The Bureau of Prisons, the United States Parole Commission, and the Department of Justice have carried out a vicious campaign to ensure he remains in U.S. government custody. These State actors understand that Dr. Shakur is a leader, a mentor, an organizer, a teacher inside their most violent and dehumanizing institutions. They have taken all measures at their disposal to ensure his life and work be destroyed. The stated goal of COINTELPRO was and continues to be "to expose, disrupt, misdirect, discredit, or OTHERWISE NEUTRALIZE" Black —a goal that has been implemented continuously against Dr. Mutulu Shakur.